2021 Accounts filed so far

It would still leave the promoted team at a disadvantage though as majority of league would get more money than them as a result of having been in the league longer.

TBF though it would be better than the current and more likely to happen than mine

 

Established teams have always got that advantage though, haven’t they?
The way to make it fairer would be possibly to keep 10% + their projected HMRC tax costs. That way those who have the biggest wage bill have the biggest amount held back. I don’t remember a Premier League team having tax issues in the last couple of years, but if a big team does drop to the Championship, at least they’ll be able to pay their tax bill for two years.

 

I appreciate and do not disagree with your basic point. However, I would just like to balance your comments a little.

The main aim of the parachute was to take away some of the financial hit of dropping back into the EFL. Players will have been put on long contracts and high pay, with the expectation of a long stay in the Premier League. If the team is relegated, the players are perceived to have failed. Their transfer value goes down, but also, the amount of pay that they can expect to receive from their next job goes down. Why would they move on for lower pay? They will not do so willingly, and that makes it harder for relegated teams to adjust financially to a long term period back in the EFL. If you remember, when the Premier League was formed, there was talk of no promotion or relegation between the EFL and the Premier League because it was understood that this adjustment would be a problem. Barnsley went into administration partly because the club found it so hard to make the adjustment. It is still a problem even with the parachute.

Having said that, you are perfectly correct in your reading of what is actually happening. Relegated clubs are using the parachute more as a booster to rocket them back into the Premier League, than as a parachute to soften their fall.

 

I think that was the aim of parachute payments initially, but since it was extended from two to four years it seems to be more about the PL trying to make sure that promoted teams invest to compete and avoid too many clubs doing what Norwich do. What it does is lead to a skewed distribution of a high % of money into the EFl going to a small number of clubs.

Not sure it needs to be more than 2 years to achieve the actual aim of being a parachute.

 

Personally they should get PL money whilst in the PL.

No more no less.

Tough **** they can give a one year contract to a player with options

They live with the knowledge that they can give a player 1 year. With an option of 2nd and 3rd if they stay up.

Relegated and then that player either has option of 2nd year at championship level wage or leaves.

It's not bloody hard is it

 

The above is the only part of your post that I'd disagree with, as our administration was due to a unique set of circumstances around the ITV Digital TV deal. Parachute payments at the time we were relegated from the Premier League only lasted for 2 seasons, so we'd already made the budgetary adjustments around them ending after the 2000 play-off final (the sale of Hignett being the main one). Administration didn't happen until 2 years after this.

Apart from that, I think we're singing from the same hymn sheet about our frustrations with the concept of FFP, parachute payments, and the financial chasm that exists between the Premier League and EFL finances, which is the root cause of pretty much all that has gone wrong with how clubs are generally now being run.

 

The main aim of parachute payments is to create a closed premier league.

Remember these are determined by premier league clubs.

Agree with all the points made by @nezbfc

 

I think the extension largely came about because the gulf between the top and bottom of the Premier League has widened so much in recent years. In 1997/98 we managed to (eventually) compete to avoid relegation from it whilst still not spending more than £1.5m on any individual player. If we'd have made it through the play-offs last season the scale of what it would have taken to attempt to finish 4th from bottom would be so unrecognisable from this that we would struggle to unwind ourselves from it within two seasons of relegation, which is essentially why the payments have been extended to 4 years since then.

 

That's partly the problem. Cos all this foreign "investment" is with the knowledge that they don't get a one off pay day for that one season.. It's sustained for more than one season if they go down. Up to 3 additional seasons.

It needs scrapping.

 

Swansea City lost £4.1m after profit on sale of players of £12.5m.

 

Sheff Wed lost half a million A WEEK, according to their accounts. They're carrying something like £125,000,000 of debt.

 

They'll make that back in Junior ST sales when they get into Europe in 5 years.

 

If they go up they'll go straight back down

 

That’s a MASSIVE amount of debt…

 

Story emerging about Burnley….
ALK Capital bought them out with no debt.
Accounts now showing £102m owed, mainly due to a £65m loan taken out due to be paid off by 2025.
But, if they get relegated £40m has to be paid back immediately.
10 players also out of contract at end of season so if relegated not looking good for them.

 

For connoisseurs of these matters the French regulator helpfully puts all their clubs accounts together in a booklet published today for 2020/21:-

Nancy's 3.615m euro loss is on page 70 and if you need a bit of eye-popping insanity page 36 shows PSG's loss of a mere 224m euros.

 

The Sheffield Wednesday Accounts have now been filed at Companies House. They make Barnsley FC look well run. Their turnover (including Grant £0.8m, and including profit on player sales £0.6m was £13m. Their wages were £24.2m. That is, their wages were almost double their turnover. As you say, the company lost £26m last year after profit on player sales of £0.6m. Their accumulated losses are now £124m, and that would be £38m more were it not for the profit on selling the ground in 2018. The loan from their owner is £51m, but remember that back in 2018, the club sold its ground to its owner for £60m, a profit of £38m. Without that, his loan would be an amazing £111m.

I have no idea why Chansiri does not simply bale out, because even a promotion to the Championship just means increasing their losses as they try to compete there.

 

Where’s the Co-Op bank when you need them eh?